Cult Turn EN 4
The Cultural Turn
Overview Page of The Cultural Turn
30 Chapters（0/30)
Cul_Turn_EN_1 Cult_Turn_EN_2 Cult_Turn_EN_3 Cult_Turn_EN_4 Cult_Turn_EN_5 Cult_Turn_EN_6 Cult_Turn_EN_7 Cult_Turn_EN_8 Cult_Turn_EN_9 Cult_Turn_EN_10 Cult_Turn_EN_11 Cult_Turn_EN_12 Cult_Turn_EN_13 Cult_Turn_EN_14 Cult_Turn_EN_15 Cult_Turn_EN_16 Cult_Turn_EN_17 Cult_Turn_EN_18 Cult_Turn_EN_19 Cult_Turn_EN_20 Cult_Turn_EN_21 Cult_Turn_EN_22 Cult_Turn_EN_23 Cult_Turn_EN_24 Cult_Turn_EN_25 Cult_Turn_EN_26 Cult_Turn_EN_27 Cult_Turn_EN_28 Cult_Turn_EN_29 Cult_Turn_EN_30 ...
Back to translation project overview
4 黄锦云(The “Culture Turn”in the Chinese Traditional Translation Theory) Cult_Turn_EN_4
Abstract
Chinese and Western translation research has roughly gone through the linguistics research stage, linguistics research stage and cultural research stage. In the 1990s, the concept “cultural turn” was proposed in the preface of Translation, History and Culture by Bassnet and Lefevere. After the disputes about "text" and "quality" discussed in the translation of Buddhist scriptures and other language transformation issues, Chinese traditional translation emerged its cultural quality in the technical translation of Ming dynasty. This paper tries to analyze the cultural turn in Chinese traditional translation history.
Key words
Culture turn, Chinese traditional translation theory
摘 要
中西翻译研究大致经历了语文学研究阶段、语言学研究阶段和文化研究阶段、20世纪90年代文化学派代表人物巴斯内特、勒弗维尔在合著的论文集“《翻译、历史与文化》序言中提出了‘文化转向’概念”。纵观中国传统译论，自佛经翻译中所讨论的“文”“质”之争、“五失本三不易”“五不翻”等语言转换问题之后，早在明末的科技翻译开始，中国传统译论就进入到文化转向的肇始阶段。本文试图从文化转向的视角重读中国传统译论。
关键词
文化转向、中国传统译论
Introduction
In 1990, Bassnet and Lefevere co-published Translation, History and Culture, formally putting forward the idea of cultural turn in translation. Cultural approach emphasized especially the important status of culture in translation and the cultural influence of translation in receptor-language region, treating translation as independent literature but not the mere copy of original texts. Different from the traditional approaches which aimed at convey of message or function, cultural approach put translation into the wide cultural environment, focusing on the cultural contexts, history and the norms (Zeng, 2006: p. 45). Wang Kefei (1994:57) puts forward the concept of " history of cultural translation", emphasizing the study of the meaning, function and influence of translation on culture (especially the target language culture), as well as the restriction of culture on translation.Although the concept of "cultural turn" was proposed in the 1990s, a careful study of traditional Chinese translation theories will reveal that the cultural turn has been involved in several climaxes in the history of Chinese translation.
China has an over five thousand-year long history of human civilization and a three thousand-year history of translation. Ma Zuyi believes that there are three translation climaxes before the May Fourth Movement (1919): the translation of Buddhist scriptures from Han dynasty to Song dynasty; the techinical translation in late Ming and early Qing; and the Western translation after the Opium War (1840). According to Xuan Huifang, at the beginning of scientific translation in the late Ming Dynasty, traditional Chinese translation theory entered the initial stage of cultural turn. This article will first introduce the relationship between culture and translation, and then reread the three climaxes of Chinese translation history and analyze its cultural turn. Finally, it can be concluded that Chinese translation has developed towards a cultural turn in the late Ming dynasty.
The cultural approach in translation
Culture turn means the process that cultural approach substitutes for linguistic approach and cultural factors was valued by translation. Different from traditional linguistic approach by which the word, phrase, sentence, and text are the translational units, in cultural approach culture becomes the main translational unit. It emphasizes the important role that culture played in translation, and treats translation as micrographic cultural shift with the studying focus shifting from the source text to translated text, from the author to the translator and the source culture to the receptor culture. The shifts from the traditional approaches to cultural approach were mainly represented by the following aspects.
Culture and translation
Culture was the creation of human beings within unique times, areas and ethnics, referring to the whole models of a society in cultural beliefs, tradition, system and values. It was the whole behavior model of a society. A nation has not only its own language, but also its own culture, which came into being under the certain natural environment, historical conditions and social reality. The common culture gave birth to the common language. People from different languages needed to exchange and such exchange must be followed by translation since language is the most important instrument for culture. So, it can be seen that culture and culture exchange are the originations of translation, and translation is the product of culture exchange. In other words, translation can never exist without culture. Translation and culture can never be separated. In the past research of translation studies, many theorists limited their focus on the linguistics, emphasizing the shifting of linguistic form and the differences of linguistic system. However, since translating activity was complex involving many social and cultural elements, many issues involved in translating activity could not be explained or analyzed on the dimension of the linguistics. Susan Bassnet has pointed out that operating translating cannot neglect the body that surrounds it, so the translator treats the text in isolation from the culture at his peril (Bassnet, 2012: p. 22). For example, there was an American joke in a newspaper: a man was arrested at the airport. Just because he was greeting his cousin Jack! All that he said was “Hi Jack”, but very loud.Nearly every American laughed when heard this. But when it was translated into Chinese, no one knew where the joking point was and it just can never be found! Translating such jokes, culture should be considered seriously to avoid those embarrassed situation. So culture was very crucial to translation. Since the initial translation was word-to-word or literal translation, ignoring the cultural background, the translated texts were obscure and disordered. Even until now, many translators are just at war between literal translation and free translation, irrespective of the essential element-culture.
The shifts in culture turn in translation studies
In traditional translation studies, much more attention was paid to the source texts, which emphasized that the translation strategies were decided by the types and nature of source texts. The translation studies were conduct from the perspective of the source text, ignoring the translated texts. J. C. Catford defined translation as the replacement of textual material in one language by the equivalent textual material in another language (Liao, 2006: p. 100). He classified translation as total translation and restricted one. The former referred to the grammar and lexica were replaced by equivalent ones in translation texts. The latter referred to partial equivalence for the source text was lacking in replaceable words. Thus, he came to a conclusion of linguistic untranslatability and cultural untranslatability. Liao Qiyi has criticized that Catford treated translation merely as a branch of linguistic, focusing on the structural shifts of language and refusing translation as an art (Liao, 2006: p. 110). Such idea was also represented by Newmark. Newmark thought an excellent translator should tend to literal translation to guarantee the loyalty to the source text and the more important the language of the text was, the closer the translation should be to the source text. He categorized texts as informative texts, expressive texts and vocal texts. Whereas for the former two categories, translators should adopt semantic translation focusing on the semantic content of the source language, the latter should adopt communicative translation to produce a similar effect between its readers and the readers of the original (Ma, 2010: p. 33). Traditional theorists concentrated on the source texts and regarded them as feudal lords. Different from the source-text-oriented method, theorists of cultural approaches attached more importance to the translated text and its functions. They no longer thought translated text as an appendix but as an independent literature which played an important role in received culture. Zohar pointed out that translated literature was part of the social-cultural systems (Xie, 2012: p. 218). Zohar thought the translation strategies should not be determined by the source texts but the role of translated texts in social-cultural systems. If it is primary, the translator is more concerned with the linguistic and cultural features of the source text to produce an adequate translation, whereas it is secondary, the translator is prepared to emphasize the literary conventions and cultural features of the target system (Xie, 2012: p. 137). Translation in one respect became an instrument to fight against hegemonic, thus the relevant translation strategies. These theorists were representatives of cultural approach in translation studies. From the above discussion, it was clear that they tended to study translation from the perspective of translated texts, ignoring the nature of the source texts, which was an important shift of translation studies in culture turn.
Lawrence Venuti called it the invisibility of translators in his masterpiece The Translator’s Invisibility, revealing that the translator’s situation and creativity are “invisibility” in contemporary Anglo-American culture (Ma, 2012: p. 191). Hu and Xu (2009: p. 28) wrote in their co-authored journal that invisibility meant no trace of translator should be read in translated literature by readers making it as fluent and natural as native literature. Fu lei, a famous Chinese translator, insisted on the principle in all his life that an ideal translation was just like the one written by the original author in Chinese. All these in fact ignored the role of translators, and treated them as a translation instrument or servant to original author, refusing any personal idea or style of language. So it was obvious that traditional translation gave too much importance to original authors and lowered the status of translators. However, theorists of cultural approach represented by Venuti challenged such invisibility fiercely. He thought that invisibility in essential was a fiercely and rough adaption of original texts in terms of native value of culture, so it to a large degree suppressed and erased the intrusive value of original texts, which represented the hegemonism of European countries and America and showed disrespect for minors in the sense of hegemonic culture (Hu & Xu, 2009: p. 29). Although different from Bassnett, Venuti practiced cultural approach in the perspective of minor countries, it provided a new viewpoint of translator’s visibility. In general, translator’s visibility referred that translator was independent, living in a different environment from the author and possessing different experience and so he would understand the original text in his own way and bring it to the translation (Wen, 2010: p. 34). Translator’s visibility added energy to the translated texts, making them readable. Adre Lefevere promoted rewriting in translation studies, focusing on the manipulation of the original text. Thus, the translated texts existed with soul and creativity. When the readers read the translated texts, they would not only have an access to the minds of the original authors, but also feel the charming of translators.
Culture turn in Chinese traditional translation theory
The earliest translation activities in China date back to the Zhou dynasty (1100BC). Documents of the time indicated that translation was carried out by government clerks, who were concerned primarily with the transmission of ideologies.It was during the Han dynasty (206 BC - 220 BC) that translation became a medium for the dissemination of foreign learning. The Buddhist scriptures which were written in Sanskrit needed to be translated into Chinese to meet the need of Chinese Buddhists. The translation of Buddhist scriptures during this period emphasized the linguistic aspect of translation and the equivalence between the source language and the target language. After the disputes about "text" and "quality" discussed in the translation of Buddhist scriptures, "five to lose the original, three not easy", and "five not to translate" and other language conversion issues, scientific and technological translation at the end of the Ming Dynasty began to break away from the tradition of comparing the source language and the target language. The discussion category of translation studies pays more attention to the discussion of translation studies at the macro cultural level such as the selection of translation materials and the social functions of translation.
Cultural trun in Ming and early Qing dynasties
At the end of the Ming Dynasty, Chinese translators represented by Xu Guangqi, Li Zhizao, and Yang Yanyun were the first to transfer translation from the field of religion to the field of natural sciences. They also jumped out of the linguistic category of contrast between source and target languages, and directly introduced traditional Chinese translation theories to the social and cultural background of the attention of translation and cultural school. The traditional scholar-officials represented by them attempted to make Chinese technology catch up with the world's advanced level through translation, which reflects their national development consciousness with translation as a tool to achieve the world. In the process of co-translation with missionaries, In the process of translating the book together with the missionaries,they made clear discussions on the purpose and social function of translation, and manipulated the selection of translation materials that were mainly scientific and technological translation at that time. This was precisely the social transformational function of the target language emphasized by the Western cultural schools. At that time, the translation theory mainly focused on the purpose of translation, its function in the society, and the selection of translation materials. As early as the beginning of the 17th century, Xu Guangqi put forward his translation thoughts, "Only through translation can you "comprehend" (learning and mastering), and only "comprehensive" can "super win" (surpass and win)."Li Zhizao also put forward that his translation thought is "make it convenient for daily use", in order to "administer the people's livelihood, and not suffer from its disadvantages."This is the very positioning of the social function of translation in society.
On the selection of translation materials, Xu Guangqi suggested Emperor Chongzhen to introduce more Western materials. In fact, it was after the translation of Western astronomy and calendar books, and to continue to introduce 10 branches of Western science, namely meteorology, geodesics, music, military engineering, accounting, civil engineering, machinery, map, medicine and clock. The above discussion shows that they have a clear explanation of what they translate.
It can be seen that these "scholar-officials" in the late Ming and early Qing dynasties had their translation theories compared to the external issues of translation, such as the urgency of translation, the function of translation to society, and what kind of books they translated. Using the view of Lefeverville from the Western cultural school, these “scholar-officials” were the patrons of translation activities at that time. As the feudal rulers at that time, their ideology was to maintain and consolidate the feudal rule, so as to prevent China from falling behind the West in science and technology. They had begun to worry about China's weakness, and they were trying to engage in "practical learning for the benefit of the country and the people" through translation, which embodied the national development consciousness of helping and strengthening the world.
Their worries were closely related to the influence of translation on traget language society in translation study emphasized by the Western cultural school. However, the "scholar-officials" as translators mainly focused on the knowledge in order to maintain Chinese feudalism. And the number of translators was small, whose aim was simple, therefore the cultural shift of translation was not obvious.
Cultural trun in late Qing dynasty
During the Westernization Movement in late Qing, Westernization Group aimed to achieve “rich country and strong army” through translation in order to maintain the feudal system．In the process of resisting external humiliation, Lin Zexu put forward the idea of “Subdue the enemies by learning from their strong points”. Later, Wei Yuan put forward the slogan of “Learning merits from the foreign to conquer the foreign” in the Haiguotuzhi(Atlas and description of the countries beyond the seas). Then Lin’s thoughts were elaborated. The translation activities they were engaged in were designed to learn from the West, with the purpose of conquering the foreign, and they had a clear autonomous orientation. The selected materials for translation at this time involved books on foreign newspapers, history and geography.
The failure of the two Opium Wars made the Chinese people more aware of the importance of learning science and technology from the West. Bureaucrats such as Zeng Guofan, Li Hongzhang, Zhang Zhidong tried to introduce the advanced western science and technology to strengthen the national defense construction under the premise of not changing the political system and ideological and theoretical basis. Western advanced science and technology to strengthen national defense. Under the guiding ideology of “Chinese Learning as the Fundamental Structure, Western Learning for Practical Use”, the Westernizationists manipulated and designed the overall pattern of Chinese translation which mainly concerned about documentary resources of natural sciences, and documentary resources of social sciences as a supplement. At that time “Western learning” mainly refered to mateials of scientific and technological documents. In terms of political affairs, those that were incompatible with the “Chinese Fundamental Structure” were mostly not introduced. In 1896, Ma Jianzhong took into account the Chinese country and society itself and proposed a targeted strategy on cultural translation. He divided the Western books that should be translated into three categories. One was the current affairs of foreign countries, that is, the legislations of House of Representatives, the negotiations between countries, and letters for diplomacy; the second was the books for officials, the books on administration, commerce and governing the army; the third was the books used by the Westernized schools in China, which were about natural science, politics, and history.
At this time, Chinese translation theory was concerned about the social effects of translation, how to select translation materials and implement translation activities. Translators were not limited to the linguistic appraoch that aimed at source languafe and target language. Instead, they placed translation in a broader social context, and set up a large number of translation halls and bureau to implement their translation strategy to achieve the purpose of consolidating feudal system.
Compared with the previous stage, the translation materials in this period had been greatly expanded, from technology to military and mechanical manufacturing, and a few Western laws and regulations had been translated. The number of translations had greatly increased, and the cultural shift in translation was in the development stage.
In the Sino-Japanese War (1894), the Qing government’s navy and army failed miserably, declaring the complete bankruptcy of the Westernization Movement. At this time, many progressive people realized that the key to China’s backwardness was not its military technology, but the backwardness of its political system. The new faction, represented by Kang Youwei, Liang Qichao and others, led the translation culture strategy: learning Western society and natural sciences through translating and printing books with the aim of establishing a constitutional monarchy, improving politics, and reforming the law. At the same time, he advocated that translating Western law, social science works and political novels was the way to enlighten and change Chinese people’s thinking. The purpose of the Translators of the Reformers was not to maintain the feudalism at that time like the Westernizationists. They hoped to use translation to change the mainstream ideology, and to learn from the Western political systems so that they could change China’s backwardness through the reforms. The Reformists not only pointed out the importance of translating, but also clearly announced the priority of different materials. The translation content they designed was different from the scientific and technological literatures such as military engineering and technology emphasised by the Westernizationists, but mainly politic, law and various academic books. In addition, in order to increase the speed and efficiency of translation and facilitate the realization of the reform, they also proposed that Japanese books can be translated preferentially.
Yan Fu also proposed ideological enlightenment through translation. As one of the most important figures in the modern period of translation in China, he was the most influential translator and translation theorist. Yan Fu was a cultural intermediary who, at a critical moment in history, sought to make European works of political and social science accessible to the people. In 1896, he founded a newspaper in which he published a great many articles and editorials defending his political views. Yet it was through his translation, in particular his 1898 translation of Thomas Henry Huxley's Evolution and Ethics (1893) that he established a reputation throughout the country. The impact of Yan Fu's work was well illustrated by the reception of Huxley's work. A biologist and supporter of Darwin, Huxley had applied the theory of evolution to society as a whole. Whatever the relevance of this method, there can be no doubt that for Yan Fu "struggle for life" and "natural selection" were concepts that met the needs of his country at that time. In his translator's notes, Yan Fu declared that the powers that had invaded and exploited China were morally and intellectually "superior," and that China had become "inferior" as a result of relentless international competition. If China did not fight for its own existence, it would succumb to ineluctable domination or genocide. As can be imagined, the translation of Evolution and Ethics set off a heated debate throughout the country, involving scholars, conservative bureaucrats and the Manchu aristocracy, and the schools, where the text was frequently used for instructional purposes and the "survival of the fittest" became a favorite essay topic. He set down the triple translation criteria of "Faithfulness, Fluency and Elegance," which he called "Xin Da Ya" in the preface of the translated Evolution and Ethics. These criteria influenced the development of translation practice and theory for almost half a century after it came into being. "Faithfulness" requires that the meaning in the target language should be faithful to the meaning of the original; "Fluency" is the requirement of intelligibility of the target language text, the translated text should be in accordance with the language rules of the target language; "Elegance" requires a translation to be esthetically pleasing. There have been different comments and critiques of Yan Fu's triple criteria in the modern history of translation in China. Most translators or translation critics accepted Yan Fu's "faithfulness" and "fluency," but some thought that "Elegance" is not always valid.
His translations about Western social science, novels and textbooks had been viewed as a way to have “wide knowledge and wisdom”. His translation strategy is also a cultural translation strategy: from the selection of translation materials to the application of translation method, the purpose was to change people’s backward ideas and then change the backward situation of the whole country. Compared with the Western soceity, the Chinese scholars at that time were translating and studying culture. In translation studies, although not very systematic, the focus was often on discussing the important role that translation played in social change, inn other worsd the important role of translation in the traget language society.
As for the translation of pure literary works, it palyed an objective role in being more of cultural enlightenment than of artistic value appreciation. Lin Shu's contribution to China's literary translation cannot be denied. He was the first translator to translate western literature into classical Chinese. He has been regarded as the pioneer of literary translation in China. His translations cover a wide range of works by a large number of writers from more than ten countries, including Britain, America, France, Japan and Russia. Among his works, the most famous are: La Dame aux Camelias, Uncle Tom's Cabin, David Copperfield, and Hamlet. Literary translation during the late Qing dynasty broke the Manchu's "closed-door policy," and brought to the Chinese people the lives, customs, ideology and social lives of western countries. The introduction of western ideology and democratic progress had an impact on the intellectuals and social reformers of China.
Conclusion
It was unanimously agreed that the cultural turn was introduced globally in the 1990s by the Western cultural translation theorists. However, looking at the history of Chinese translation, from the beginning of techonical translation traditional Chinese translation theories had jumped out of the barriers of linguistics and entered a stage of cultural attention that links translation and translation studies with society, history and culture. Translation theorists payed more attention to the historical and cultural background behind the text, and regarded translation as a powerful work to integrate and improve cultural trends. From this point of view, the "cultural shift" in traditional Chinese translation could date 100 years earlier than the West. As Gu Zhengkun holds that cultural translation and translation research in China in the late 19th century has remarkable domestic characteristics. First of all, the Western contemporary school of translation research and culture mainly studied the known translation phenomenon, while the Chinese translators and translation researchers at that time mainly designed and studied the translation activities. Second, the former advocated studying manipulation in known translational phenomena, while the latter itself advocated the manipulation and design of translational activities. As the manipulator and designer of the translation, they designed the topic, purpose, method of the translation content. Thirdly, Chinese translators and translation researchers at the time often held multiple positions. They were designers of Chinese cultural translation projects, and political circles or academics. Therefore, they paid more attention to the social, historical and cultural background behind the text, and paid more attention to the complex process of operating the text. They also knew better what translation strategies to adopt and formulate to make the translation work in the target language culture. The pioneers of Chinese translation theory adjusted and updated cultural strategies in accordance with the changes in the actual situation, so that Chinese traditional translation theory possessed strong political characteristics. These concerns are the focus of the cultural schools in contemporary Western translation studies.